Matt Perger on Grinders... - Page 3
-
- Posts: 645
- Joined: 10 years ago
You're not even rebutting why you think the paper is flawed , just saying its rubbish ....weebit_nutty wrote:It's not about attention. remember *you* said that. Suggesting he's doing this just to stay relevant is an even worse smear IMHO. And suggesting that if one co authors a published paper it shouldn't be met with a critical eye? This is the internet.. But hey You keep believing that.
I may not be into Perger but even I gave him my time to read his article and interpretations. After so many, I realize he's hardly an authority on anything except maybe pouring hot water and being a poster boy for grinders.
- weebit_nutty
- Posts: 1495
- Joined: 11 years ago
Did you even read the article?Mrboots2u wrote:You're not even rebutting why you think the paper is irregular , just saying its rubbish ....
You're not always right, but when you're right, you're right, right?
-
- Posts: 645
- Joined: 10 years ago
Did you ? Honestly look tell us why you think it's flawed, otherwise your just bellyaching from your keyboard ...how am I meant to know why you think it's flawed . Give us a debate , constructive criticism .